A Short Piece

The Authority Circle

It’s rational not to trust authorities we require to be rationally informed.

Photo by Jason Wong

Consider the following premises:

1. We require institutions, experts, and authorities.

(See this piece by George Orwell. Also, the short story “Ludwig” by O.G. Rose is relevant.)

2. Institutions, experts, and authorities sometimes take advantage of people, make mistakes, and the like.

(See The Opioid Crisis, Gulf of Tonkin, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, the Replication Crisis, etc.)

3. It can be rational to distrust the institutions, experts, and authorities we require to be rational, but it is rarely clear when we should distrust them (and which), seeing as we probably need the institutions, experts, and authorities to help us figure this out — which puts us in a vicious circular problem. I will call this the “Authority Circle,” hinting at Heidegger’s “Hermeneutic Circle,” and it seems to be a kind of “Nash Equilibrium.”

4. To break the “Authority Circle,” we must act nonrational and perhaps trust authorities we have reason not to trust, which means we must make ourselves vulnerable. Please note, as discussed elsewhere, that “nonrational” is distinct from “irrational”: it is an action that transcends the simple binary and cannot be understand as simply one or the other. Also note that if the majority cannot handle “nonrational vulnerability,” democracies could be in trouble.

5. “Small and near systems” are easier to “nonrationally trust” than “large and distant systems.” Trusting the US Federal Government, which controls the military, exists hundreds of miles away, and is shrouded in bureaucracy, is much more difficult than trusting government entities I can visit, personally meet, and the like. Similar logic applies to scientific institutions, colleges, and so on. This is not to say “large and distant systems” have no role and shouldn’t exist, but it is to say that the “Authority Circle” will prove harder to penetrate. A few more points:

A. Do note that “ruling powers” could use the fact that we “must nonrationally trust them” to their advantage, as a way to manipulate us, a possibility which makes it even more rational not to trust them as we must.

B. If “What Does Religion Have to Do With Game Theory?” by O.G. Rose is correct that religions have helped society engage in “nonrational action” (without which society would collapse), perhaps it is not by chance then that the “Church” and the “State” have often worked together. Religions have perhaps helped people “trust in a State which people have reason not to trust” by framing the State as “doing God’s work,” as “expressing God’s Will,” and so on — perhaps religions have proven pivotal in helping societies manage the “Authority Circle.” Also note that perhaps we have hoped that “autonomous rationality” could “fill this hole” left by the decline of religion, but “autonomous rationality” is impossible (as discussed throughout O.G. Rose).

C. If “large and distant systems” are necessary, then it will likely prove necessary that we learn to live with the dilemma of the “Authority Circle,” which is existentially unsettling.

6. “Small and near systems” are likely no longer possible (at least not without devastating results).

(Consider “The Rationality of Invincibility and Self-Destruction” and “No Exit,” both by O.G. Rose)

7. We must learn to “nonrationally trust” “large and distant systems,” which is likely existentially too much for the majority to handle. If the majority cannot handle this dilemma of the “Authority Circle” today, the majority will likely vote rationally against authorities, authorities which are necessary for informed action.

8. Democracies will probably consume themselves (though it doesn’t follow that therefore totalitarian and/or centralized systems aren’t worse). Considering this, perhaps the “Authority Circle” is a reason history repeats? Perhaps the only way to “fix” the problem is with war (to “clean the slate,” in line with the thinking of Mancur Olson in The Rise and Decline of Nations). Hard to say.

Episode #29: Ludwig and the Authority Circle

For more, please visit O.G. Rose.com. Also, please subscribe to our YouTube channel and follow us on Instagram and Facebook.




Iowa. Broken Pencil. Allegory. Write Launch. Ponder. Pidgeonholes. W&M. Poydras. Toho. ellipsis. O:JA&L. West Trade. UNO. Pushcart. https://linktr.ee/ogrose

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Recommended from Medium

The Psychology of Fascism


Head transplant- on the verge of medicine and philosophy

Gun Control Laws Infringe Upon the Right to Self-Defense?

State and delusion

Death and the Intriguing Mr. Wittgenstein

The keys to happiness according the most underrated philosopher ever

10/09/2019 — Psychological Entropy, Summary

Psychological entropy model, major goal and minor goals and their relationship with entropy distributions

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
O.G. Rose

O.G. Rose

Iowa. Broken Pencil. Allegory. Write Launch. Ponder. Pidgeonholes. W&M. Poydras. Toho. ellipsis. O:JA&L. West Trade. UNO. Pushcart. https://linktr.ee/ogrose

More from Medium

Belonging Again (Part 16)

The Amazing Spider-Man #19 Review and an Important Update

The Amazing Spider-Man #19 Peter Parker Johnny Storm Human Torch Fantastic Four Flint Marko Sandman Enforcers Fancy Dan Daniel Brito Ox Raymond Bloch Jackson W. Brice Montana Stan Lee Steve Ditko Marvel Comics

Why AI won’t follow the laws of Robotics and how we can fix it. Hopefully…..

Althusser and “Fahrenheit 451”